50-200 or 55-300 ?

Started Dec 9, 2009 | Discussions thread
HMayling Regular Member • Posts: 148
Re: 50-200 or 55-300 ?

I had the 50-200. It always seemed to be short of what I wanted. Now my two zooms cover the whole range of normal walk-around needs. My Sigma 17-70 macro with the Pentax 55-300 is a good sharp set of lenses. Almost any need I can think of that isn't covered is a specialty item. Super telephoto if you're a serious birder, or heavy duty sports require a very large very expensive tripod only telephoto. If you can find a few specialty used kmount primes you have just about every possibility covered. If you have these and take good pictures, you are a photographer. I cannot justify spending thousands of dollars for a lens if it isn't paying you. Remember, it's your eye and understanding of your tools that make great pics.
Lord help me to consistently follow my own advice.

K10D, Sigma 17-70, Pentax 55-300, 50mm/1.4 SMC Takumar, Minolta manual 50mm macro lens. Pentax 2.8mm/f2.8manual K-mount, Pentax 360 flash, 4 old flashes and a pile of accessories. Pentax bellows and 100mm bellows lens.

 HMayling's gear list:HMayling's gear list
Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow